importance of the first amendment in an independent press. i kicked off today with an essay about press freedom. it's not just about journalists and reporters, its for all of you at home. press freedom is really your freedom. check it out at cnn.com/opinions and i'll see you back here next week. russian denial. president trump seeming to backtrack after appearing to side with vladimir putin over his own intelligence agencies. and calling former intelligence chiefs political hacks. two of the men he called out, james clapper and john brennan, are here to respond exclusively next. plus, dueling plans. republicans in the house and senate try to come to an agreement on taxes. >> we're not doing this for political benefit. we're doing this to help improve people's lives. >> as new details are released, will some middle class americans take a hit?

treasury secretary steve nmnuchn joins me. roy moore. >> they involve a minor and completely false and untrue. >> what will the republican party do if moore wins? ohio governor john kasich weighs in. hello, i'm jake tapper in washington with the state of our union totally confused after a week of discipline on his foreign trip in asia, president trump unloaded overnight in a series of tweets and comments hitting his critics as, quote, haters and fools and saying he tries so hard to be friends with north korea's leader kim jong-un while also essentially calling kim jong-un short and fat. president trump also appeared to kind of, maybe, sort of backtrack on earlier statements in which he seemed to take the word of russian president vladimir putin over american

intelligence agencies, asserting unequivocally russian election interference. during a press conference in vietnam the president was asked to clarify once and for all if he believes russia interfered in the u.s. election. here's his response. >> i believe he feels that he and russia did not meddle in the election. as to whether i believe it or not, i'm with our agencies, especially as currently constituted with their leadership. i believe in our intel agencies, our intelligence agencies. i've worked with them very strongly. there weren't 17, as was previously reported. there were actually four. >> just to be perfectly clear here, president trump was given yet another chance to definitively state, quote, i believe russia interfered in the 2016 election, unquote. again, he did not do so. those comments come after president trump took aim at america's intelligence community after his meeting with vladimir putin, speaking to reporters on air force one in a conversation the white house will not allow us to play the audio from, president trump says he, quote,

really believes putin means it when he says he didn't meddling saying, quote, he says i didn't do that. i think he is very insulted by it. if you want to know the truth, don't forget, all he said is he never did that. he didn't do that. i think he's very insulted by it, which is not a good thing for our country, unquote. then he went on to suggest the assessment of the u.s. intelligence community was politically motivated. he says, quote, give me a break, they're political hacks. you have brennan, clapper and comey. comey's proven now to be a liar and he's proven to be a leaker, so you look at that and you have president putin, very strongly vehemently says he had nothing to do with that. here to respond directly to the president's comments are two of the former intelligence chiefs the president called out, former cia director john brennan and former director of intelligence general james clapper. i'll just start, what is your response, mr. brennan, to what president trump said about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence agencies? >> well, i think mr. trump knows that the intelligence agencies,

specifically cia and nsa, fbi, are the ones have responsibility for counterintelligence and looking at what russia does, it's very clear that the russians interfered in the election. it's still puzzling as to why mr. trump does not acknowledge that, embrace it and push back hard against mr. putin. the russian threat to our democracy and our democratic foundations is real. le and i think his continuing to not say very clearly and strongly that this is a national security problem and to say to mr. putin, we know you did it, you'd have to stop it because there are going to be consequences if you don't. >> and he -- once again, he said what he said originally and giving the impression to a lot of people that he -- he sided with putin and he started attacking the u.s. intelligence agencies, you two in particular. when given an opportunity to clarify, to say what do you believe, he didn't really clarify. he said -- he didn't say i believe russia interfered in the 2016 election and i think they need to stop and i take it very

seriously. he says, putin believes what he believes. i side with our intelligence agencies, but it was vague. why do you think he does that? >> i don't know why the ambiguity about this because the threat posed by russia, as john just said, is manifest and obvious and has been for a long time. putin is committed to undermining our system, our democracy and our whole process. and to try to paint it in any other -- any other way is, i think, astounding and, in fact, poses a peril to this country? >> what threat, what peril does it pose to the country? >> number one, as we've seen, the evidence that's come out since the publication of our intelligence community assessment on the 6th of january further reinforces the depth and magnitude and scope and the aggressiveness of the russian interference to include they very astute use of social media.

apart from that, something we don't think about too much, is the fact that the russians are embarked on a very aggressive modernization of their strategic nuclear forces. to include a very capable and scary counterspace program. they only have one adversary in mind when they do this. oh, by the way, the russians are an abject violation of the inf treaty, intermediate nuclear force treaty so the russian says do not harbor good intentionless towards the united states and there shouldn't be any illusions or ambiguity toward that and our president fosters that ambiguity. >> the president also called you and fbi director political hacks, all three of you worked in senior levels in the obama administration, at you also worked during the bush administration. how do you respond to the charge? >> first of all, he was referring to us as political hacks because he was trying to delegitimize the intelligence community assessment done. james clammer, james comey and

brennan did not write that. it was written by the law enforcement officers of this great country. secondly, i feel very honored to be associated with jim clapper and jim comey in the same category. given the source of the criticism, i consider that criticism a badge of honor. third, i found it particularly reprehensible that on veterans day donald trump would attack and impugn the integrity and character of jim claerp, who served in uniform, for 35 years, who responded to the call of his country to go to vietnam, flew in over 70 combat support missions over vietnam. like senator mccain, really did put his life at risk because of this country's national security. and to impugn the character of somebody like jim clapper on veterans day, who has dedicated so much of his life to this country, i just find that outrageous and it's something that i -- i think that the -- i think mr. trump should be ashamed of but it doesn't seem anything he does he feels any shame whatsoever. >> what is the effect of these

attacks, not on you two or jim comey, but on other people in the fbi, in the cia and the nsa, people who are still there, who worked under you and are still there working to try to make the country safer? >> first, i have to reciprocate what an honor it has been to serve with the likes of john brennan and jim comey, who are dedicated public servants and have served this country long and well and with great integrity. i think it can have a positive -- cannot have a positive impact on the morale of the workforce of the intelligence community but i believe in my heart the men and women of the intelligence community will continue to convey truth to power even if the power ignores the truth. >> at what point president trump said he thinks vladimir putin is insulted by the suggestion and the conclusion by the intelligence agencies that russia interfered in the u.s. election. what do you make of that, his

bringing up putin feels insulted? >> i think mr. putin is very clever in terms of playing to mr. trump's interest in being flattered. and also i think mr. trump is, for whatever reason, either intimidated by mr. putin, afraid of what he can do or what might come out as a result of these investigations. so, it's very worrisome. and i think it sends a worrisome, very disturbing signal to our allies and partners who are concerned about russian interference and their democratic processes as well. so, it's either naivety, ignorance or fear. in terms of what mr. trump is doing, vis-a-vis the russians. >> president trump took to twitter yesterday to try to justify his position, his position, posture toward russia. he said, quote, when will all the haters and fools out there realize that having a good relationship with russia is a good thing not a bad thing. they're always playing politics. they're always playing politics, bad for our country. i wanted to solve north korea, syria, ukraine terrorism and

russia you can greatly help. that's his argument, russia can be a help on these issues and the posture of being belligerent towards russia wouldn't assist in that matter. >> i think they could be but i think it's naive to assume they will be. the likelihood the russians will pursue like interests with us is slim and none. i think it's naive and perilous to this country to make an assumption that russia is going to behave with the best interest of the world or certainly united states in mind. they're not. >> so, mr. brennan, director brennan, you said a couple minutes ago you talked about the reasons why president trump might be susceptible to what putin tells him and you talked about flattery. you also talked about fear. i can't ignore the fact that all of this comes at a time when there's a lot of speculation

about whether or not the russians have damaging information about president trump. this comes within the context of the fact that president trump has been willing to criticize everyone from the cast of "hamilton" to meryl streep but has yet to say one disparaging word about vladimir putin. do you think this idea that maybe the russians have something about -- on him, have compromising material, have relevant here? >> well, i don't know. if mr. trump is considering that. i just know that he has been very determined to try to delegitimize any effort to come up with the truth in terms of this investigation. his attacks on the intelligence community, on the assessment, the attacks on the media, this is an effort to, again, try to undermine those quarters that could pose a serious threat to him. also, i think it shows the insecurity that he still feels about the election and how russian interference may have

contributed, in fact, to that elections. so, i think there's a combination of factors that are motivating the president at this time. >> do you know of any compromising material that the russians might have on him? >> i have shared everything i know with the intelligence committees. >> that's not a no or a yes because we're not privy to the information that you gave to the intelligence committees. >> that's true. >> okay. let me ask you a question about how in 2016 you were all watching and monitoring and assessing what was going on with the russian interference. in retrospect, was it a mistake of president obama not to make a bigger public deal of this at the time? >> well, this is in the could have, would have, should have department. bearing in mind, there wasn't much of a template or rule book for how to handle a situation like this. i think the arguments, the concern the administration had was if with did make a big public deal about this, would we

first be amplifying what the rush sha russians were doing? frankly, i think the president was probably sensitive to the accusation that he was putting his hand on the scale and trying to affect the outcome of the election if he spoke up about it. now, we did, we put out a statement, we at the time then secretary of homeland security jeh johnson put out a statement on the 7th of october which was pretty forthright about what the russians were doing that was issued before the elections. unfortunately, it got emasculated and overcome by the "access hollywood" tapes so it sort of got lost in all that. i think what was done was appropriate. i guess you could go back and say, well, we should have been more aggressive or done something earlier, i don't know. but there were good reasons why there was caution and discretion here.

>> director brennan, so general clapper said there wasn't the template but russians have been attempting to interfere in elections before. 2016 wasn't the first time. it was the most successful time ever probably in russian history but it wasn't the first time. why were the intelligence agencies, and not just the intelligence agencies, law enforcement, communications, every part of the government, why was it not better prepared? >> well, i think we were prepared. it's a question of during campaign season, you want to be able to understand everything that the russians might do. so, we had a responsibility to make sure the president and the congress were informed, public statements that were made about russian attempts to interfere. at the same time we wanted to be able to know what they were doing so we might be able to this wart anything more extensive they might have done. i think the pushback publicly and privately against the russians gave russians pause because it was made very clear we were onto their game and it was going to have very serious consequences. i think the law enforcement

intaish intelligence forces have their antenna up all the time. i think we did a pretty admirable job. >> since you two left the office in january 2017, we've learned more about attempts by the russians to reach out to the trump campaign. we've learned about donald trump jr. eagerly accepting a meeting to get dirt on hillary clinton from somebody he was told was a russian lawyer. we've learned with the comey plea agreement, with george papadopoulos, former foreign adviser for the trump campaign, we've learned that he was told by a professor with ties to the kremlin in april 2016, long before i knew anything about the hack organize the public knew anything about the hacking, that the russians were claiming they had damaging information. now, you said in january 2017, this year, that you knew of no collusion. did you know of those two events? >> no, i did not. and the statement i made at the

time was true. we had no -- i had no direct evidence of collusion. now, we had lots of concerns because we were aware of multiple meetings that were going on while -- at least my part, was not directly of the content of these meetings but we were certainly concerned and the metaphor i've use before is i think our dashboard warning lilts were clearly on about what was going on. but to say specifically we had evidence of -- smoking gun evidence of collusion, no. but, of course, a lot more has come out that's, you know -- raises, i think, circumstantial questions if nothing else. >> what message do you think president trump is sending to vladimir putin right now in terms of russia's continued attempts to interfere in elections in europe and potentially in the united states again? >> well, i think what he's doing is saying to putin vp, we need to put this behind us because

there's important work to to be done. i agree. we need to find a way to improve relations between moscow and washington. but i think by not confronting the issue directly and not acknowledging to putin that we know that you're responsible for this, i think he's giving putin a pass. and i think it demonstrates to mr. putin that donald trump can be played by foreign leaders who are going to appeal to his ego and try to play upon his insecurities, which is very, very worrisome from a national security standpoint. >> do you agree that donald trump can be played by foreign leaders like putin? if so, does that make you concerned about the security of the united states? >> i do. i think, you know, he seems very susceptible to rolling out the red carpet and honor guards and all the trappings and pomp and circumstance that come with the office. and i think that appeals to him and i think it plays to his insecurities.

and, yes, i do think both the chinese and the russians think they can play him. >> and then lastly, do you know, and maybe you can't answer this question, but do you know, director brennan, of any laws broken by the trump campaign, anybody affiliated with the trump campaign, when it comes to working with russians on election interference? >> i'm just a former intelligence officer. i never had the responsibility for determining whether or not criminal actions were taken. but since leaving office on the 259 of january, i think more and more of this iceberg is emerging above the surface of the water. some of the things i knew about, some of the things i didn't know about in terms of some of the social media efforts that russia employed. so, i think what bob mueller, another public servant, is doing is trying to get to the bottom of this and i think we'll find out how large is iceberg really is. >> if i can add, i think it's absolutely critical for the country that there be closure on this and there be some finality

to what did happen. >> general clapper and director brennan, thank you for being here. we appreciate it. it sounded good at the time, but now republicans are way from their promise that every american will see a tax cut. steve mnuchin will weigh in on that. roy moore is accused of sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old. governor kasich is furious and he's here with us. it's open enrollment. time to open the laptop... ...and compare medicare health plans. why? because plans change, so can your health needs. so, be open-minded. look at everything-like prescription drug plans... and medicare advantage plans from private insurers. use the tools at medicare.gov. or call 1-800-medicare. open to something better? start today. ♪

i trained as hard as i could to stay alive. i have more than 30 pieces of shrapnel still in my leg. but i still push myself to the limit. if it weren't for my tempur-pedic, i wouldn't be able to sleep on my left side at all. ♪ the tempur-pedic veteran's day savings event is here, and now is the time to take advantage of this incredible offer. save up to $500 instantly on select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets. find your exclusive retailer today at tempurpedic.com. pepsoriasis does that. it was tough getting out there on stage.

i wanted to be clear. i wanted it to last. so i kept on fighting. i found something that worked. and keeps on working. now? they see me. see me. see if cosentyx could make a difference for you- cosentyx is proven to help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx, you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease, tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. never give up. see me. see me. clear skin can last. don't hold back... ...ask your dermatologist if cosentyx can help you find clear skin that lasts.

welcome back to "state of the union." i'm jake tapper. just days after rnz laid out their tax reform, mitch mcconnell is saying some working americans may pay some. he says he misspoke when he said nobody would get an increase. house speaker paul ryan is modifying his words. a spokesman for ryan told "the washington post" he misspoke when he called it a tax cut for everybody. to discuss is u.s. secretary treasury steve mnuchin. i want to get to taxes in a moment. i want to get to russia. after president trump made his initial comments about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence agencies, republican senator john mccain tweeted, nothing

america first of taking the word of kgb colonel over u.s. intelligence agencies. his knee eve and places national security at risk. you heard general clapper and director brennan on the show a few minutes ago saying they think president trump is being played by putin. what's your response? >> in all due respect to your previous guests, those were the most ridiculous statements. president trump is not getting played by anybody. president trump was focused on some very important issues, which is north korea and syria. those are areas we need to work together with russia and get them on board with our strategy. >> why not definitively come out and say, i think that russia -- i believe u.s. intelligence agencies, russia sleefrd in the u.s. electionses and they must not do it again, impose the sanctions congress passed months ago. why not take this more aggressive and assertive position? >> we are imposing the

sanctions. i think the president has had private conversations. i think the country is ready to move off this and focus on important issues. >> let's talk about tax reform because that's why you're heard. you heard mcconnell and ryan have walked back assertionses that everyone in the middle class will get a tax hike. it's true most people in this plan will get a tax cut. you'll acknowledge some, some middle class americans will see a tax increase. >> as you know, one of the things that's so complicated about our tax system today is everybody has a different situation, takes advantage of different parts of the code. it's very complicated. so by simplifying the code we're putting everybody on the level playing field. weave literally run hundreds if not thousands of examples within treasury. for most people, and, again, it may not be 100%, but by far the majority, both the house and senate version provide middle income tax relief. that's what we to want do. and both plans have for the

median family of four over 1, 0 $1,000 $of tax relief which is quite significant. even a family of $300,000, which is a lot of money in new york, they're also getting several thousand dollar tax cut. so, i think both plans accomplish what we're looking to do. >> but certainly there are middle class voters who voted for president trump who are going to get a tax increase in this plan if it becomes law. and that's not what they were told by candidate trump that would happen. >> it's not what he wants. and, again, as we go through both plans. the house, i expect, will pass their bill this week. the senate will move on it after thanksgiving. we'll end up in conference and we'll fine-tune this. again, the problem is the tax code is so complicated that literally everybody may take advantage of a different piece. and we want to make this simple and fair and provide middle income tax relief. i'm comfortable we'll end up doing that. >> are you committing to saying

that you are -- you want this to be fine-tuned, you want this to be changed so that any middle class americans who would have their taxes increase, which is a minority but still a chunk of middle class americans, that you want that fixed before president trump signs it to law? >> what i'm saying is there are slight differences between both bills. good news is both the house and the senate and the administration have the same objectives. that's about middle income tax relief, that's about fixing the business tax system so that we're competitive and the slight changes between both bills i'm comfortable we'll iron out in conference so we can get something to the president to sign in december. >> you have been saying the republican tax plan, which will reduce the corporate tax significantly, will unleash so much growth that it will pay for itself. you've been criticized. i want to read you something from your predecessor, former treasury secretary larry summers. i'm not aware of so irresponsible estimate coming from a treasury secretary in the last 50 years.

what he's saying is, by relying on a projection that the stock market will rise because of this, it's irresponsible to suggest it's going to pay for itself. your response? >> again, i think it's unfortunate that secretary summers has come out and said some of the things. there are lots and lots of economists that come out and support our claims. by the way, we've been completely transparent. different models will show different things. in our models we believe there will be $2.5 trillion of growth. we're happy to go through the numbers, give the details. we want full transparency to the american public. the important issue is, if we increase gdp by 30 or 40 bases points, this plan is break even. >> i want to point to the fact that president trump keeps saying this is the biggest tax cut in history. take a listen. >> i'm giving the largest tax cuts in the history of this country. >> it will be the biggest cuts ever in the history of this

country. >> this will be the biggest tax cut in history and the history of our country. >> we've tried to find a way that this is true. but it's not. if you look at the tax bill as a percentage of the gross domestic product, it would be the eighth large heest. if you look in inflation-adjusted dollars, it's the fourth largest. if you look at it dollar for dollar, its the third largest isn't it important to have factual information when debating this? >> this will be the largest change since president reagan? >> the largest change? >> the largest chain to the tax system and largest cuts to the system -- >> that's not the biggest tax cut in history. >> biggest tax cut going from 35% to 20% in corporate taxes? if that's not the biggest tax cut to make our businesses competitive, what is it? the pass-through rate is going to be the lowest rate since the 1930s. >> but you're making -- >> that's not -- >> it sounds like you're making factual arguments different from

what president trump when he says it's the biggest tax cut in history. >> it is the biggest tax cut in history on most every single part of the plan. going from 35% to 20%, we're going down to discounted rates on pass-throughs, back to the 1930s. this is about bringing drill ons of dollars back on shore and creating economic boom for our country. >> i want to ask you about roy moore, the alabama senate candidate. know this is not your bailiwick but you're the only administration representative we have. he's been accused of engaging in sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl in 1949. based on what we know right now, should judge moore step aside? would that be the better step for the republican party? >> i only know what i see on tv and what i read in the paper. but if the allegations prove to be true, he should step down. >> but i guess the question s when you say if the allegations prove to be true, i don't know we'll get any more proof. we have four women on the record saying he came onto them and in one case had sexual contact with them when they were teenagers. he denies it. i don't know we'll get any more information one way or the other.

no judge is going to weigh in on this. based on what we know now, should we step aside? >> i'm not an expert on this issue but i say people should investigate this issue and get the facts. if these allegations are true, absolutely. this is incredibly inappropriate behavior. >> do you believe the allegations? >> again, i just watch what i see on of it. >> but you have an opinion. do you believe them? >> it appears that there is a significant issue here that needs to be addressed. >> secretary mnuchin, thank you very much. really appreciate it. thanks for coming in today. let's go to the number one two democrat in the senate, dick durbin, member of the senate judiciary committee. senator durbin, let's start with russia. what do you make about president trump's comments about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence agencies? >> incredible to me. we had a hearing, we produced a facebook ad with a phoney committee. it was blasting hillary clinton. and it was paid for with rubles from russia. what is the president waiting to see before he acknowledges what

our intelligence agencies and most people in both political parties acknowledge? there was a definite attempt by russia to influence this election. >> according to the nonpartisan tax policy center, 76% of americans would get a tax cut next year under the republican plan. well middle class families receiving on average a cut of about $800. democrats, however, keep pushing the notion that the average middle class family is going to see a tax increase. "the washington post" factchecker gave that claim four pinocchios. i'll say what i said to secretary mnuchin, shouldn't be honest when debating this issue? >> absolutely. we know the wealthiest americans are going to get a definite long-term permanent tax cut. under both plans, the house and senate, the estate tax, alternative minimum plans will be permanently reduced. when it comes to working families, it's a mixed bag. in my state of illinois, it's going to be devastating that they cannot deduct their state and local and property taxes that they pay. they'll be paying a tax on a tax.

this is not a tax break for them and violates the basic. there's a reason this plan has been prepared in secret, why it's not being scored by cbo as it does traditionally, because it doesn't add up. the only way republicans can make it add up is by cutting medicare by $473 billion and medicaid by $1 trillion. that is not the way to deal with this economy and to build real growth. >> you're the senate democratic whip, your job is to count the votes. do you have commitments from everyone who caucuses with the democratic party that they will oppose the republican plan? and have you heard from any republicans who might join you? >>. >> jake, we just saw this is plan on friday. they just unveiled this plan in the senate. members of the senate have heard some rumors, have seen the house bill, but i can tell you, each one of them comes to it and says, why would we want to risk our economy raising the taxes on many working families to give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest people in america and

to run up the national debt? that is not a sound policy to build america's economy. >> there's been a lot of talk about judge roy moore. if he does get elected, should the u.s. senate refuse to seat him? >> well, i tell you, that's several steps removed from where we are today. president trump is the leader of the republican party in america. it's his responsibility to step forward and say more and do more when it comes to this situation in alabama. many of my republican colleagues, whom i respect, they have strong family ties and feel very passionately about this, have spoken out on it. and i respect them for doing it. it's time for the president to do the same. >> if your colleague, senator bob menendez, new jersey democrat, is convicted on the corruption charges he's on trial right now, the jury is still deliberating, will you vote to expel him? >> i'm not going to get into the hypotheticals on either of these situations. as i said, several steps removed. i'm hopeful when all is said and done that bob menendez will be returning to the senate representing the state of new

jersey. >> senator durbin of the great state of illinois, thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. republicans are scrambling to distance themselves from senate candidate roy moore as the alabama judge is doubling down on his denials that he engaged in sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl when he was 32. one republican calling for them to pull their support, governor john kasich, joining me from his home state of ohio. good to see you. the white house is saying judge moore should step aside if the allegations are proven true. is that good enough? >> i don't think so, jake. i was informed in the beginning, he's too divisive of a person to go over to the senate. look, there's a growing list of people that think he ought to step aside and not be the standard bearer. this is not a criminal case or anything like that. if you're the candidate for the party and these kind of things come out and there's so many people now in alabama saying, yeah, we believe her, and growing numbers of republicans like john mccain, timberwolves romney, john kasich saying he should step aside, of course he

should. >> roy moore is not going to step aside. he cannot be removed from the ballot. given these simples, do you think republicans in alabama should vote for doug jones, the democratic candidate? >> jake, i think he should step aside. if not, maybe you can get a write-in candidate. lisa murkowski did it in alaska. she was elected. i think she's urging somebody down there to do that and, you know, people of alabama have to figure it out. and i would hope they would say, no, this is not acceptable. maybe the party will do it. pressure is mounting. we'll see what happens. >> if he's elected despite thes allegationses -- >> i can't tell you about the senate. i can't tell you about the senate, jake. that's up to them. there are growing numbers of senators deeply disturbed about this. the senate campaign committee has apparently cut off funding. let's not get out there. let's see if something can be resolved here in the next few days. >> let's turn to russia. prt has been quick to denounce everyone under the sun,

including you, but he continues to have faith and believe what vladimir putin says to him, including apparently over the assessment of the u.s. intelligence committee. what, in your opinion, is going on here? >> i don't know, jake. when i read that he was calling, you know, these intelligence guys -- let me tell you, it's not just tguys interviewed, bob gates, leon pa net tashgs you just don't call these people names. read this and i couldn't belief it. i was sort of incredulous what the president was saying. apparently he's walked back his comments to some degree. hairs no question what russia did. they meddled our election, sefshd a butcher in syria, invaded ukraine. it's crazy. i just don't understand it. and i don't know why he's saying those things. i would just tell you that putin is a former kgb agent. this is not a guy you can trust or a guy you can really have any confidence in.

it's ridiculous. so, hopefully -- i'm glad he walked it back, jake. that was a good thing that de that but i was actually glaber gasted when i read the earlier accounts. >> he walked it back a little bit but he still refuses to say definitively i believe the u.s. intelligence agencies and i believe russia tried to interfere in the election and i have made it very clear they need to stop. he won't do that, at least not publicly. >> well, i think he -- look, you're trying to get me to tell you what's happening in his head. i don't know what's happening in your head half the time. i don't know. it's just that the evidence is there, whether it's facebook, twitter. of course they meddled in our election. their activities in ukraine, where they misled, lied, attacked people in ukraine, people have lost their lives over there. what's happening in syria, the vicious bombardments that happened over there. it's just -- it's just ridiculous. i mean, i -- look, you want to be cool, firm.

that's the way you have to be with putin or any of these other autocrats. one thing i'm concerned about is i look at this asia trip. you now have 11 countries agreeing they're going to get together and be involved in trade. you have china rising with their economic program trying to influence the world and where, like, coming home. we're staying home. and it doesn't make any sense, both from an economic point of view but also from a geopolitical point of view. the united states matters. we need to have influence in the world. we get it not just with trade but with with our military activity and our relationship with our allies. to have walked away from this is just really a very, very big mistake. >> governor, speaking of elections, i want to ask you about last tuesday's election results, democrats won key races in new jersey and virginia. you, of course, remember -- >> they won all over the country. they won all over the country. in places no one had seen democrats win. i was talking to some folks in pennsylvania and some democrats went over there in areas that

have always been republican. look, the republican party has just gotten smaller here. anti-trade, anti-immigrant, trying to take health care away from folks. this is not going to work. it's things i've been talking about for a long time. we have problems in this country and you have two paths. you can either double down, be negative and look for scapegoats or say, yes, we have problems but we can fix them. that's what we do here in the state of ohio. but if a party's going to be anti-environment and anti-trade, and one other thing, for both parties, first of all, the democrats didn't win anything. they just kind of lucked into it because people are fed up with both parties. and the millenials and the again xers are going to equal the baby boomers in 2018 and the millenials and gen xers are comfortable with america's place in the world. if either of these parties, democrats moving farther and farther to the left, the republicans worrying about everything on the extreme right, playing to their base, these millenials and gen xers are up

for grabs and it will reshape the entire landscape of american politics, and thank goodness. >> is it possible you'll be there running as a third-party candidate in 2020 to take advantage of that, sir? >> no, is there any -- jake, you know i don't know what's going to be happening. i want to finish my term as governor. but who knows what is going to happen in terms of people who might look for another way. it's very hard to be an independent. i'm just suggesting to you that the country is getting fed up with the kind of fighting and partisan politics. it was reflected on tuesday. against the republicans, not for the democrats, i mean, i don't believe that democrats had any great victory. they just were the benefit of a lot of negativity and small thinking on the part of republicans. can the republicans turn it around? absolutely. take care of the daca, the d.r.e.a.m.ers here in the country, get a tax cut that's balanced, begin to be more positive about the environment. welcome immigrants while

protecting the border. this is what the republican party is. it's what it's always been and it's what i fight for along with a number of my colleagues. so, you know, i -- i'm optimistic but they have to change. getting smaller, getting more inward, taking america backward, it's not going to work. >> governor kasich coming to us from a very toasty looking room. thank you for joining us this morning. >> very nice here, jake. >> it looks it. president trump, friend to all, trying cozy up to vladimir putin tweeting he's tried so hard to be friends with kim jong-un and now getting friends with a man who's bragged about killing people with his own bare hands, president duterte. can't t the market. but through good times and bad... ...at t. rowe price... ...we've helped our investors stay confident for over 75 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

[notification tone] ♪ i love your vest. your crocheted purses have wonderful eyes. ♪ in the modern world, an app can help you find your perfect match. and with esurance, coverage counselor® can help you find great coverage that's a perfect match too. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home... ...with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. neulasta helps reduce infection risk by boosting your white blood cell count, which strengthens your immune system. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems,

allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro.

throughout history, the one meal when we come together, break bread, share our day and connect as a family. [ bloop, clicking ] and connect, as a family. just, uh one second voice guy. [ bloop ] huh? hey? i paused it. bam, family time. so how is everyone? find your awesome with xfinity xfi and change the way you wifi. welcome back to the "state of the union." senator santorum you heard john brennan and james clapper expressing their concerns about president trump's reluctance to

take on putin directly and also saying -- brennan said he thinks putin is able to play him. what do you think? >> frankly, i agree with secretary mnuchin, i think it's ridiculous. the fact of the matter is that, you know, donald trump is trying to conduct foreign policy, work with world leaders. he repeated what vladimir putin said. he said in an interview that he agrees, he sides with our intelligence community. he says that he -- that -- all he said was putin said it, he means what he says. he didn't say he agrees with him. and i think his point that, you know, we need to work with world leaders. it used to be democrats encouraging us to work with the soviet union and find common ground. now because of the scandal everyone is on the other side and the russians are the worst people in the world when eight years ago hillary clinton and barack obama wanted to do a reset with them. so for the average trump voter, they're looking at this as purely politics, as nothing to do with the substance of the

matter. it's just about getting donald trump. >> i see it differently, surprisingly. >> surprisingly enough. >> i think trump is very well aware of the sentiment out there that was expressed in the cnn poll that was issued earlier this past week, which says that two-thirds of americans, including a lot of republicans, are really concerned about russia and russia interference. i think he's so utterly freaked out and insecure about his position as president, knowing that russia did intervene that yesterday he committed three very unpatriotic acts, standing up with putin saying he believes putin over the u.s. intel agencies and and -- he didn't say is that. >> and third, criticizing james clapper, three-star general on veterans day. honestly, no wonder he quickly in the same news cycle did a

backspin on it because he knew how horrible that looked for himself, his administration and for the country. no wonder john mccain said, this is not america first. really, this is putting russia first. >> what do you think? >> look, i think he's -- putin is a kgb guy. you should view him with a jaundiced eye. all leaders should view him with a jaundiced eye. i think it's a slight manipulation of his statement that he said he agreed with him. he said he believed what he was saying. this is trump's thing, he dances around things and says 14 different things when he should just say -- wait for it. he doesn't even have to agree with clapper. he can agree with mike pompeo, his own guy, and say i agree with the assessment russia is involved. i'm with trump on some of the idea overplaying the idea that $150,000 of facebook ads might have add in undermine american

democracy. clapper has been proven to be unreliable narrator telling the u.s. senate about spying. don't talk about them overseas. admit russia did get involved, we to want stop it in the future and deal with that rather than dealing with the kgb guy. >> he didn't say he believed putin. he did say putin believes it. he did give a lot of people the impression that he was sympathetic to putin. >> he did. and, you know, this quest for legitimacy on trump's part isn't just about this issue. it seems to be a lot of his life has been in quest to be legitimate, to be accepted in new york. never accepted there by the high-class people there. at a certain point it's painful to watch somebody who can't get his mouth around what everybody else is saying. can you say -- when you're president, can you say this thing russia did is wrong, i'm

going to stop you if you do it. at the same time, we have other issues we have to work together on that. that's what a leader does. he can't get his mouth around the first part of that sentence because it undermines his sense of accomplishment and this big, big thing he got. it's putting the country at risk. >> ironically it would undermine less if he would just say it. >> i want to turn to the other huge story in politics, roy moore, the alabama senate candidate. let me show you what ray allen is reporting. quote, a republican close to mcconnell said he's willing to lose the seat to prevent someone who's guilty of these things from taking it. what is your take, senator santorum? >> my take is -- i just saw a news report out of birmingham television station where they went into a neighborhood, suburban neighborhood that moore lost to strange in the primary and they couldn't find a person who mrooefd it. >> believed the allegations? >> believed the allegations. these are not moore supporters. . goes to show -- this was "the

washington post" that dug this up. obviously, spent a lot of time and energy. it just plays into the narrative that donald trump has created in this country and that roy moore has fed into that, you know, the folks here in washington are after, you know, folks like them. and there's a backlash. >> except four women are also alabamians. they're part of that group as well. and i don't -- look, i think when you want and elect an elmer gantry, you get an elmer gantry and he's made his bones off not backing down in the face of this kind of thing. i think he'll continue to do that so he'll probably stay on the ballot. i think even if trump told him to get off, i think he'd be like, i don't think so. they're in a real tricky situation here. except that he may just win, despite the fact that -- look, the media has been unreliable on sexual harassment issues in the past. just two weeks ago nbc passing on the weinstein story because somebody was buddies with somebody.

you can read this story close to an election, go through and see the contemporaneous reports, four women who don't know each other, there is m.o. here, those are markers to say, is this credible or not? there's not going to be anything in a court of law so you have to decide here, is this credible? >> yeah, i'm -- this disturbs me, the whole thing -- not just the media but the whole utter tribalism we entered into. yesterday i retweeted and said, oh, my god, is this what we've come to? a former aide to rand paul but it was honestly indicative of what we're hearing out of ambassador ambassador which is, i'd be find with a child predator in the senate so long as it would keep the democrats from stealing this seat. child molesters are evil, democrats are even worse. i mean, are we really at the point where people in alabama because they don't want to be perceived as bowing to the national media are going to choose somebody who has been a

child molester of a 14-year-old girl over somebody who has been a career prosecutor who happens to be a democrat? i hope to god we are not in that place. but there was a recent pew poll that said over 40% of each party view the other party as an active threat to democracy. that's dangerous. >> there are republicans who have come out and withdrawn their endorsement. senator mike lee of utah, senator cassidy of louisiana, the national republican senatorial campaign ended funding. let's be frank, roy moore could absolutely still win. >> yeah, he could. and you know, this is the -- we haven't mentioned steve bannon in this, but this is bannonism on trial. bannon is trying to create this sense of an aggrieved identity group, frankly, a white aggrieved identity group that's under siege by everybody. and this is that in its worst

form. you're not supposed to vote as a father. you're not supposed to vote as a brother. you're not supposed to vote as a woman. you're supposed to vote as a member of this identity group against the world. and if that wochrks, it's very d for the republican party and very bad for the country. at some point, there's -- i have not seen any reason not to believe these women. and so, at some point, other things have to matter than this kind of ultratribal, i think it's a very good term, tribal identity of politics growing in america at the expense of every other value. >> the tribalism is on the democratic side, too. look at bob menendez. he's been accused of horrific things and standing by their man until chris christie leaves to appoint somebody else if he survives this. the bottom line, its tribalism on both sides. this could be solved if roy moore would do what i've recommended to many senate candidate who is have run into this problem in the past, where they do or said or been accused

of something that makes them un-electable or a lot less electable than your again ishg republican who is equally conservative, and that is to put the party and the country above his own personal gain. >> do you think he should do that? >> if i was given a candidate and i cared most about my country and the policies i wanted to accomplish, of course i would step back. i haven't seen anybody -- i mean, i can go down a long laundry list of senate candidates i've had this discussion over the last 20 years and they all stick it out thinking, i'm right, i'm going to show them. they end up losing. the things they say they care about are actuallydy mibished. robber adder holtz, a great guy, congressman that's been there a long time, can step in immediately, gary palmer, murdoch, along -- there's a bunch of them out there sitting in the wings who could easily be plucked out of the republican committee in alabama and put in moore's place and that election

would be a ten-point race. >> part of bannon's pitch is also that a guy like moore is good because he is specifically bucking the party. the idea that the party apparatus would have power over him is -- that runs obverse to what voters one. bannon, this is what i believe is true, he says, look, they've been playing by these rules for years and not getting called to so you have to arm up. you can't unilaterally disarm. it's predator equity is what we're going for in american politics. it's super unhealthy. i'm talking hillary clinton, bill clinton, who had very bad allegations and proven ones. that's a really unhealthy way to do business. it may be that alabama -- in alabama roy moore ends up winning. the thing about bannonism, when it's tested in the rust belt, when it did make a difference in the presidential election, does it work? it didn't work in virginia.

>> and every single republican is going to have to stand for do you believe, for example, as roy moore says, homosexuality should be a crime, do you belief that 9/11 was god's revenge for sodomy. all these crazy things they will have to stand up for. president trump says he believes vladimir putin means it when he says russia didn't meddle in the 2016 presidential election. perhaps that's because some were whispering in president trump's ear that everything is just one big conspiracy. that's this week's "state of the cartoonoion". >> it doesn't come to surprise that he dispatched his chief theorist -- and whether the russians were involved. he's never tried away from tablging the tough conspiracy theorys. >> if he wasn't born in this country, which is a real possibility, then he's pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics. >> getting to the bottom of the crazy conspiracy theory about where obama was born took five long years. >> they can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter.

like, did we fake the moon landing? what really happened in roswell? and where are biggy and tupac? >> now that he's president, mr. trump no longer has to do all the hunteding and fact-finding on his own. he now has a full cabinet at his disposal. >> there are over 2 million criminal aliens in this country. >> hud secretary ben carson is the man for the job. >> when you look at the way the pyramids were made, there were alien beings coming down. >> speaking of national mysteries -- >> i see elvis back there. elvis, this is the last chance we get. >> could rick perry say no to that one? with his golf course in scotland, president trump himself might be the best person to investigate the loch ness monster. >> you don't want to be in that path. >> one area the president is not so interested in examining further, the actual facts of foreign interference in the 2016 election. >> i call it the russian hoax.

one of the great hoaxes. >> thanks for spending your sunday morning with us. can you camp me here every sunday and weekdays on qult the lead" at 4:00 p.m. eastern. "fare "fareed zacharias gps" starts right now. >> this is "gps," welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live from new york. today, abe, xi, moon, president trump's big meetings on the world stage. has this big asia trip changed america's position in the world? >> we are not going to let the united states be taken advantage of anymore. >> and for the better or worse? richard